I have been accused of being unreasonable, unkind, and even unchristian to my opposition of amnesty and sanctuary cities; however, the accusation is not based on solid reasoning or the Scripture. Leftist Evangelicals misrepresent the Bible to make it fit their pathetic, perverted, progressive, and political positions.

Bleating heart Evangelicals want us to believe that we should have open borders because the undocumented aliens are trying to escape tyranny, gangs, and poverty, so our nation should overlook their illegal entry into our nation. After all, we are a Christian nation. No, first of all, only people can become Christians; however, a nation can become Christianized or influenced by the Bible. Furthermore, most of the enthusiasts for open borders and amnesty purposefully confuse an individual’s responsibility with a nation’s obligation.

Everyone who wants to understand ancient literature knows he or she must discern who wrote it, to whom it was written, and when it was written.

Trump’s religious critics are not asking those questions. Exodus 23:9 is often used by the Bible-twisters to support their cause; however, they use a defective hermeneutic to construct their false anti-Trump position. “Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.” That passage is dealing with a person’s obligation, not national obligations.

Most of those Evangelicals who quote that passage know that but are being less than honest to establish a very shaky political principle.

It is easy to prove my contention about this being a personal obligation. Verse 3 of that chapter warns the ancient Jews (and us today), “Neither shalt thou countenance (give approval) a poor man in his cause.” Moses was warning us about showing favor to a person because of his condition, whether rich or poor.

Believers must be ever vigilant not to be swayed by emotions but by justice. The time-honored truism is, “Let justice be done, though the heavens should be dissolved.”

I heard one of the great evangelists of the last generation say, “Do right though the stars fall from Heaven.” The illegal aliens have not done right. They resolutely broke our laws and crashed our gates, and forced themselves in front of others who have followed our laws and procedures. There are five million people who are waiting in line legally, but illegal aliens refuse to wait. Their arrogance and audaciousness are astounding, while their advocates are angry and appalling.

Is there a limit to how many immigrants we are expected to admit? Do we wait until the ship is sinking before we realize there are limits? If an overcrowded ship sinks, then everyone is lost. Do-gooders (as opposed to those who do good) are not the most logical thinkers.

Jim Wallis is another do-gooder who doesn’t think logically and is president of the leftist religious outfit Sojourners. Jim, no longer editor of their journal, declared, “Evangelicals finally realize that how we treat the stranger, these 11 million undocumented people, [No, it is now 22 million] is how we treat Christ himself.” Wallis was evidently napping during his seminary hermeneutics class because he did not get that from the Bible. Christians are to be thoughtful, gracious, kind, and helpful, but that does not translate into being softies, suckers, and sycophants. We could really show how gentle, gracious, and generous—as well as unwise, unreliable, and unhinged—we are by emptying all our prisons!

Well, some governors have tried that, and how has it worked?

Wallis went on to say the leadership of the Evangelical Immigration Table, which includes the National Association of Evangelicals and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Convention of the Southern Baptist Convention and the evangelical community, have “never been more united on an issue.” Jim has one of two problems: he is either disingenuous or uninformed because the vast majority of evangelicals want illegal immigrants to go home.

A Pulse Opinion poll revealed that 78% of Evangelicals surveyed believed that the biblical command to “love the stranger” means “to treat the stranger humanely while applying the rule of law.” Additionally, a Pew Research Center poll showed only 25% of white Evangelicals believed the U.S. had a “responsibility” to accept refugees into the country.

Wallis is wrong again, but then, he should be used to that.

Christ commanded everyone to treat others the way they want to be treated, but that has nothing to do with how a nation deals with illegal aliens. Let’s return to Exodus 23:9: “Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.”

Incoherent preachers neglect to tell their parishioners that the Jews were in Egypt by invitation and were not gatecrashers as are modern fence-climbers. What is never mentioned is the Jews were special guests as long as Joseph was alive, and a friendly Pharaoh reigned.

The Jews were strangers in Egypt (but not illegal aliens) even though they eventually ended up as slaves. Exodus 23:9 does not apply to the immigration issue even slightly. Unlawful foreigners choose to break our laws, also arrogantly demanding entrance into our nation expecting to be cared for upon their arrival. These lawbreakers are not sojourners or strangers but scoundrels and are encouraged to do wrong in breaking our laws by many leftwing religious groups, even some Evangelicals.

Some of these leftists’ religious groups get paid $1850.00 for each immigrant they settle in an American city. Follow the money.

Other desperate defenders of open borders tell us Joseph, Mary, and Jesus were migrants fleeing into another land for safety, so American immigration laws should reflect that fact. However, it is not a fact. The family were not aliens since they were part of the Roman Empire, as was Egypt at that time. Moreover, it was perfectly legal to travel from one Roman province to another. Careless religious leaders should be ashamed of their misrepresentation of Scripture to support a very unsubstantiated position. These people seem to think they exhale divine revelations, but they expel a mish-mash of immature babbling and purposefully distorted theology.

While the Evangelicals are correct in that the Kingdom of God has no borders and welcomes all who qualify through faith in Christ, the city of Jerusalem, the nation of Israel, and all other nations, states, cities, and villages and the Evangelicals’ gated estates do have distinct borders.

Even walls! Gasp.

This is a good example of how far left many Evangelicals are. Evangelical churches are wallowing in diversity and choking on heresy. Evangelicals have proved to be what astute people knew they always were: a hodgepodge of theological lightweights (with a few heavyweights), philosophical cripples, and devotees of political correctness.

Alas, soft, left-leaning Evangelicals are part of the family of God if they have been born again, and I am required, as a member of that family, to warn them, even rebuke and shun them if they continue in their sinful behavior.

Many soft Evangelical leaders are sad, smug, and sanctimonious hypocrites, but it pays well.

(Dr. Don Boys is a former member of the Indiana House of Representatives who ran a large Christian school in Indianapolis and wrote columns for USA Today for 8 years. Boys authored 18 books, the most recent Muslim Invasion: The Fuse is Burning! eBook is available here with the printed edition (and other titles) at www.cstnews.com. Follow him on Facebook at Don Boys, Ph.D.; and visit his blog. Send request to DBoysphd@aol.com for a free subscription to his articles, and click here to support his work with a donation.)

What sane person would disagree with such good advice? Note that the worthy advice was sent to everyone; however, Jim Wallis of Sojourners took exception. Jim thought Graham was racist and heartless. Jim parades as an evangelical, having discarded the rags of his fundamentalist past, but he is really a spokesman for the left. It is embarrassing to mention it but far left billionaire George Soros gave Jim’s nonprofit group $200,000! Jim denied it on a talk show but later had to backtrack and admitted the sullied but substantial gift.

Speaking of generous, Jim, who was Marxist in his youth (now, only a socialist), is paid $218,000 per year for his efforts in laying guilt on middle class whites for the condition and treatment of Blacks. He tries to identify with common people but the average American makes $50,000 per year; so, Jim, you ain’t one of us.

In reality Jim is the liberal white man’s Al Sharpton although Jim reads a teleprompter better than Al. Jim and his motley crew of leftist clergymen didn’t like Graham’s suggestion that maybe parents could do a better job in rearing their offspring. Duh, is that in question?

The Sojourners crowd thinks of Jesus as a skinny dude wearing sandals, hair to his shoulders, drinking a bottle of Perrier water while he signs up unregistered voters for Democrats. Informed people know that Christ came to die for our sins thereby changing the way we live and providing a home in Heaven rather than Hell. Christ was more concerned about people than problems. Social Gospelers like Jim are more concerned about the environment than they are about eternity. Just as the social gospel failed in the early 20th century so it is failing today.

Wallis and his sycophants responded to Graham’s advice by thrusting a rusty dagger into his back. Many famous leftist evangelicals signed onto the response and rebuke of Graham. The pompous blowhards mentioned Graham’s “outsized influence coupled with apparent ignorance.” There, isn’t that gracious and broadminded and really tolerant? They continued in their self-righteous rant with “We will not tolerate this type of flippant, patronizing commentary from faith leaders on critical issues that mean life and death for many in the body of Christ and in communities across America. We won’t tolerate it, even one more day.” Who do these guys think they are? They have as much power as a 40 watt bulb. What can they do but tolerate it and send out press releases and a few tweets.

In their open letter to Graham, they told him he had “sinned against” them and his statement had “hurt and influenced thousands.” He was accused of being “crude, insensitive, and paternalistic” and had “oversimplified” the situation. However, Graham had simply said that young people should be taught to obey police officers and never resist; that way they will stay alive. Sounds very simple and it would have been better for everyone (except the race baiters) if his advice had been followed in the Brown case.

Most youth are not the most astute thinkers but I remind them that when they have a problem with a cop, they must understand that he has a billy club, handcuffs, a couple of guns, mace, and a radio that can bring a swarm of cop cars into the neighborhood in minutes. I think Graham gave some practical advice.

Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown are at the center of this discussion and when all relevant facts are acknowledged and one puts aside his terror of condemning black parents, then of course, they failed. It is not necessary to repeat the unsavory record of each young man. Nor is it necessary to prove that had they followed Graham’s advice, they would still be alive as would some protestors; and others would not have been bankrupted by “peaceful” protestors.

Wallis reaches way back for Jim Crow and for plantation owners for help in his effort to take down Graham. But those terrible episodes have nothing to do with young Black thugs who “feel their oats” and defy police instructions. If it turns out that the police are wrong then they can file a complaint and a whole bevy of civil rights attorneys will line up to take their cases and get justice–and a potful of money for everyone.

Graham’s critics brought up “mass incarceration and criminalization,” but they would have been wiser not to call attention to that. Permit me to elucidate. Homicide is the leading cause of deaths among black men in U.S. and 90% of the killers are also black. Between 1976 and 2005 Blacks committed more than half of all murders in the U.S. with only about 13% of the population. In cities under black rule (mayors and often police chiefs) such as Cleveland, Washington, New Orleans, Atlanta, Memphis, Newark, Richmond, Detroit, and Philadelphia corruption, crime, and chaos are common. Blacks often complain about the drug laws putting so many blacks in prison but Black politicians in DC led the effort to pass those laws. Blacks yell about “over-policing” yet that’s where the 911 calls come from!

The holy reverends really ran off the rails when they wrote: “Your blanket insistence on obedience in every situation exposes an ignorance of church history.” But Graham did not say or imply such a thing. There are times when Christians must disobey some unjust laws. I would not always obey without question if I’m stopped for giving gospel literature on the street, etc., but if an officer pulls his gun, I’ll back off, file a complaint, have my day in court and collect a hundred thousand from the government. And continue my Christian activity.

The epistle from the holy reverends even compared the protestors in Ferguson to principled Christians in the past who paid with their lives to stand true to the Gospel. That is a deceitful, disgraceful, and despicable comparison.

Wallis, in his youth, danced with glee when he heard that the U.S. had lost the war in Vietnam; and he and his parson pals can’t hold Graham’s coat with respect to work with the diseased, desperate, and depressed people of the world. Graham’s Samaritan’s Purse has been helping mostly black people around the world for 40 years and he has hugged and helped thousands of Blacks while Wallis shakes the hand of “oppressed” Blacks saying, “I feel your pain.”

And for Jim Wallis to accuse Graham–with his Samaritan’s Purse– of being unkind, uncaring, and unthoughtful is like a skunk accusing a rabbit of having bad breath!

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

Jim referred to Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech and suggested it failed Trayvon Martin. King’s desire to have everyone judged by their character rather than the color of their skin is one of the most awesome thoughts ever spoken. (Of course, some of King’s famous 1963 speech was “borrowed” from another preacher, Archibald Carey, who delivered it at the 1952 Republican National Convention! Some of King’s defenders call his plagiarism “voice merging” that is “common” among Black preachers!) Leaving that scandal for a later column, judging people by their character is still an awesome concept that all civilized people should espouse.

Wallis wrote that Zimmerman followed Trayvon “because of the color of his skin.” No one on earth knows whether that is true except Zimmerman and it is irrational demagoguery to declare it. Does any honest person think Zimmerman would not have followed a white man acting as Trayvon did? After all, there had been burglaries and Zimmerman was a community watcher. (I don’t suppose that rises to the level of community organizer!) Moreover, it was dark and rainy and Trayvon was walking close to and looking into the houses (according to Zimmerman) and Zimmerman was doing his job as a watchman that any citizen should have done in the interest of helping protect neighbors and friends.

Jim sinks deeper into the swamp of demagoguery when he adds that “a child was killed by an adult who got away with it, because of the way Florida laws were written and interpreted.” Note that Jim declared that Trayvon was a “child,” perpetrating the myth that most of the media used ad nauseum–using a photo when he was 12 years old. Seventeen-year-old Trayvon was a 6 foot 2 inch, 160 pound male (the media reported him as being 140 pounds) while Zimmerman was a pudgy, out of shape 5-foot 7, 28-year-old. He was so stupid that he supported Obama–twice! But he didn’t deserve to have his head pounded into concrete.

Wallis admits that what really happened “will never be known” because a “black boy responded to a strange man who was following him” but Jim goes on to assure us that “it is absolutely clear that racial profiling was present in this whole incident.” (Was it Trayvon who was doing the profiling?) What unmitigated hypocrisy! We can’t know but we do know! No wonder Jim is unreliable in his theology, even bordering on the fringe. His thinking process is convoluted.

Wallis declares that “racial profiling is a sin in the eyes of God,” but he did not get that from the Bible, but then Jim doesn’t get much of his loosey-goosey theology from the Bible.

CBS News interviewed Special Prosecutor Angela Corey (characterized by liberal attorney Alan Dershowitz as “the most irresponsible prosecutor” he’s seen in 50 years!) who said that Martin died because Zimmerman profiled him. No, he died because he broke Zimmerman’s nose and pounded his head into a concrete walk. What else could Zimmerman do, especially when Martin tried to take his gun?

However, let me proceed to proclaim that there is nothing wrong with profiling if circumstances demand it. For example, it is incredibly stupid that we refuse to recognize that we have a huge bunch of religious fanatics determined to kill us. Remember September 11. To watch Homeland Security jerks at airports search and humiliate little old ladies and distinguished veterans in wheel chairs while permitting young, Middle East-looking men to board a plane unexamined is incredible, incredulous, and insane.

Wallis goes on and on and on saying “White parents should ask black parents what they were talking about with their children this weekend.” Obviously they should be telling their sons to attend school each day with their homework done, obey the teachers, get a job, also obey the law and not smoke anything stronger than corn silk or drink anything stronger than tea, and don’t meander around neighborhoods in the dark. And if asked about your presence, answer in a kind, friendly way by saying, “Hello there Mr. Neighborhood Watcher, I’m Trayvon Martin and I’m on my way to purchase some Skittles and tea. Have a good evening.”

Jim then swallows a mouthful of the tepid waters of demagoguery and says, “The spread of legalized carried-and-concealed weapons and the generous self-defense laws that accompany the guns will lead to the death of more black men in particular.” No, that’s not true. There will be more deaths of Blacks and Whites when crimes are being committed that have nothing to do with gun laws. Fact is, where concealed carry laws are legal, the crimes of violence plummet! Wonder why? Could it be because the bad guys know that many good guys are carrying guns and will use them when threatened? Isn’t that a good thing? Shouldn’t all people be taught that truth?

Struggling to stay afloat in the swirling waters of demagoguery, Jim affirms that White Americans must tell the truth about how the nation failed Trayvon Martin. However, the nation did not fail Martin. In fact, the American system produced justice in the tragedy when the media and a corrupt judicial system were stacked against justice. Trayvon was failed by some elements of the nation possibly his school, his church and for sure, his parents.

And no, Jim, America does not need “multi-racial communities of faith” to show us how to live together. All we need is to follow the clear teachings in the Scripture by living a committed, clean, consecrated Christian life. People are looking for perfect racial/cultural harmony, i.e., no racial/cultural divides. That won’t happen as long as there are sin-cursed people around. Yes, Christians should be examples of “how things ought to be” but others can’t replicate it, because they don’t have what it takes, which is a new life in Christ.

Racism in George Zimmerman has been propounded and promoted, but not proved (quite the contrary); but Jim Wallis has proved that he is a sanctimonious, hypocritical racist. And not much of a biblical theologian.

Copyright 2013, Don Boys, Ph.D.